Skidmore v. Led Zeppelin - Motion To Amend Complaint PDF

Case 2:15-cv-03462-RGK-AGR Document 98 Filed 02/25/16 Page 1 of 65 Page ID #:1674
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
Francis Malofiy, Esq.

Francis Alexander, LLC
280 N. Providence Rd. | Suite 105
Media, PA 19063
T: (215) 500-1000; F: (215) 500-1005
E: francis@francisalexander.com
Attorney for Plaintiff
Glen L. Kulik, Esq. (SBN 082170)
Kulik Gottesman & Siegel LLP
15303 Ventura Blvd., Suite 1400
Sherman Oaks, CA 91403
T: (310) 557-9200; F: (310) 557-0224
E: gkulik@kgslaw.com
11
12
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
13
FOR THE CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
14
MICHAEL SKIDMORE, as Trustee for

15 the RANDY CRAIG WOLFE TRUST,
16
17
20
21
22
23
24
v.
LED ZEPPELIN; JAMES PATRICK
PAGE; ROBERT ANTHONY PLANT;
JOHN PAUL JONES; SUPER HYPE
PUBLISHING, INC.; WARNER MUSIC
GROUP CORP., Parent of
WARNER/CHAPPELL MUSIC, INC.;
ATLANTIC RECORDING
CORPORATION; RHINO
ENTERTAINMENT COMPANY,
25
26
Hon. R. Gary Klausner
Plaintiff,
18
19
Case No. 15-cv-03462 RGK (AGRx)
Defendants.
NOTICE OF MOTION AND

MOTION FOR LEAVE TO AMEND
COMPLAINT TO ADD
DFENDANTS; MEMORANDUM OF
POINTS AND AUTHORITIES IN
SUPPORT THEREOF
Filed concurrently with Declarations of
Francis Malofiy and Glen L. Kulik;
Second Amended Complaint; and
[Proposed] Order
Date:
March 28, 2016
Time:
9:00 a.m.
Courtroom: 850
27
28
NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION FOR LEAVE TO AMEND COMPLAINT
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
NOTICE .................................................................................................................... iii
MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES........................................... 1
5
6
I.
INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................... 1
II.
FACTUAL BACKGROUND ......................................................................... 4
III.
PLAINTIFFS PROPOSED AMENDMENT MEETS THE

REQUIREMENTS OF RULE 15 ................................................................... 8
7
8
9
A.
PLAINTIFF ACTED IN GOOD FAITH AND HAS

TIMELY MOVED TO AMEND. ....................................................... 10
B.
THE SAC WILL NOT PREJUDICE DEFENDANTS OR

THE ENTITIES THEY USE TO AID THEIR
INFRINGING ACTIONS. .................................................................. 12
C.
THE SAC STATES VALID CLAIMS AGAINST THE

ENTITIES AND GRANTING LEAVE TO AMEND
WILL PROMOTE JUDICIAL EFFICIENCY. .................................. 12
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
IV.
CONCLUSION ............................................................................................. 13
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
i
TABLE OF AUTHORITIES
Page
Cases
DCD Programs, Ltd. v. Leighton,

833 F.2d 183 (9th Cir. 1987) ................................................................................ 11
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
Eminence Capital, LLC v. Aspeon, Inc.,

316 F.3d 1048 (9th Cir. 2003) .............................................................................. 12
F. W. Woolworth Co. v. Contemporary Arts,
344 U.S. 228, 229 (1952) ....................................................................................... 3
Forman v. Davis,
371 U.S. 178 (1962) ............................................................................................... 9
Griggs v. Pace Am. Group, Inc.,
170 F.3d 877 (9th Cir.1999) ................................................................................... 9
Lockheed Martin Corp. v. Network Solutions, Inc.,
194 F.3d 980 (9th Cir. 1999) .................................................................................. 9
Miller v. Rvkoff-Sexton Inc.,
845 F.2d 209 (9th Cir. 1988) ................................................................................ 12
Morongo Band of Mission Indians v. Rose,
893 F.2d 1074 (9th Cir.1990) ................................................................................. 9
Owens v. Kaiser Fund. Health Plan, Inc.,
244 F.3d 708 (9th Cir. 2001) .............................................................................. 3, 9
Qualcomm, Inc. v. Motorola, Inc.,
989 F. Supp. 1048 (N.D. Cal. 1997)..................................................................... 11
19
Statutes
20
Fed. R. Civ. P. 15(a)(2) ........................................................................................... 3, 4
21
Fed. R. Civ. P. 33(d) .................................................................................................... 5
22
Other Authorities
23
William Schwarzer, et al., Federal Civil Procedure Before Trial 8:422 ................ 12
24
Wright & Miller, Federal Practice and Procedure, 1487 ........................................ 10
25
26
27
28
ii
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
NOTICE
TO ALL PARTIES AND THEIR ATTORNEYS OF RECORD:
PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that on March 28, 2016 at 9:00 a.m. or as soon
thereafter as this matter can be heard before the Honorable R. Gary Klausner of the
United States District Court for the Central District of California, at 312 N. Spring
Street, Courtroom 850, Los Angeles, California, 90012, Plaintiff Michael Skidmore,
Trustee for the Randy Craig Wolfe Trust, will move and hereby moves for leave to
amend the operative complaint to add as defendants: Flames of Albion Music
Limited; Succubus Music Limited; Classicberry Limited, Super Hype Tapes
Limited; Sons of Binion Limited; Trolcharm Limited; JPJ Communications Limited;
and WB Music Corp. (collectively, Entities).
This motion is based on the attached memorandum of points and authorities,
the proposed second amended complaint attached to this motion as Exhibit 1, the
Declarations of Francis Malofiy and Glen L. Kulik in support thereof, and all files
and pleadings in this action.
16
Plaintiffs counsel and Defendants counsel met and conferred regarding
17
Plaintiffs intent to file this motion on February 18, 2016, by telephone. Defendants
18
stated they would not stipulate to the amendment and will oppose the motion.
19
20
Dated: February 25, 2016
FRANCIS ALEXANDER, LLC
21
22
23
24
/s/ Francis Alexander Malofiy

Francis Alexander Malofiy, Esq.
25
26
27
28
iii
1
2
MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES

I.
INTRODUCTION
Plaintiff seeks leave of Court to file a Second Amended Complaint (SAC)
for the purpose of adding as defendants certain business Entities which are owned,
controlled and operated by the current Defendants. None of these Entities were
identified by Defendants in their initial disclosures, nor have their initial disclosures
ever been amended. However, Plaintiff learned through supplemental discovery
responses belatedly served by Defendants in January 2016, and confirmed this
month by taking certain corporate depositions, that all monies derived from the
10
infringing work are channeled through these Entities prior to ultimately being
11
disbursed to the individual Defendants. Thus, the Entities are critical to the full and
12
proper adjudication of this case, in particular, to the determination of the issue of
13
damages resulting from Defendants copyright infringing actions. If leave to amend
14
is not granted, Plaintiff will just have to file a second lawsuit naming these
15
additional parties and that is not efficient for the Court or the parties.
16
17
18
Specifically, the proposed SAC, attached to this motion as Exhibit 1, names

the following new parties:
1.
Flames of Albion Music Limited: company used jointly by Defendants
19
Jimmy Page and Robert Plant to collect and disburse funds associated with their
20
publishing rights derived from the infringing work.
21
2.
Succubus Music Limited: company used by Defendant Jimmy Page to
22
collect and disburse funds associated with his publishing rights derived from the
23
infringing work.
24
3.
Sons of Binion Limited: company used by Defendant Robert Plant to
25
26
infringing work.
27
28
4.
Super Hype Tapes Limited: company used jointly by Defendants
Jimmy Page, Robert Plant and John Paul Jones to collect and disburse funds
1
associated with their performance and artist royalties derived from the infringing
work.
5.
Classicberry Limited: company used by Defendant Jimmy Page to
collect and disburse funds associated with his performance and artist royalties
derived from the infringing work.
6.
Trolcharm Limited: company used by Defendant Robert Plant to
7.
JPJ Communications Limited: company used by Defendant John Paul
10
Jones to collect and disburse funds associated with his performance and artist
11
royalties derived from the infringing work.
12
8.
WB Music Corp.: tool company used by defendant Warner/Chappell
13
for the sole purpose of signing publishing contracts with the other Defendants and
14
proposed defendants listed above in items 1 through 7.
15
Public available information, such as copyright registrations, as well as the
16
initial disclosures and other documents produced by Defendants early in the
17
litigation made no mention of such Entities. The first opportunity Plaintiff had to
18
remotely identify the Entities was in January 2016, when Defendants belatedly
19
produced documents regarding damages (approximately 40,000 pages). Yet, not all
20
Entities were identified in those 40,000 pages. It was only in their supplemental
21
responses later that month, that Defendants identified all Entities, and disclosed the
22
information which they had a duty to provide at the outset of the case. Finally, on
23
January 29, 2016, defense counsel stated outright that these Entities actually had a
24
stake in the infringing work, and thus conceded that the copyright registrations
25
Defendants had produced failed to identify the proper parties with economic
26
27
28
2
interests in the infringing work.1
Good cause exists to grant this motion under the extremely liberal standards
of Rule 15(a). See Fed. R. Civ. P. 15(a)(2)(stating that leave to amend shall be
freely given when justice so requires); see also Owens v. Kaiser Fund. Health Plan,
Inc., 244 F.3d 708, 712 (9th Cir. 2001). The allegations of the SAC, if proven,
would render the new parties essential to the proper calculation of damages in this
case since all monies received by Defendants derived from the infringing work are
channeled through these Entities. See e.g. F. W. Woolworth Co. v. Contemporary
Arts, 344 U.S. 228, 229 (1952).
10
Other factors considered by courts in evaluating motions to amend under Rule
11
15(a) similarly militate in favor of permitting amendment here. As noted above,
12
Plaintiff responsibly and in good faith relied on public records and on information
13
provided by Defendants to determine the parties reaping benefits from the
14
exploitation of the infringing work. Although Defendants knew all along that these
15
documents and information were outdated, they purposefully omitted any document
16
which could alert Plaintiff to the existence of the Entities. Since learning of the
17
identity of the Entities in late January, Plaintiffs counsel, a small practitioner,
18
drafted the SAC, sought Defendants approval to file the SAC, and upon
19
Defendants refusal, prepared this Motion along with taking depositions,
20
designation of expert witnesses, and other ongoing trial preparation work in this
21
case.
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
Both the public records of the copyright office and Defendants document
production regarding the owners of the copyrights wrongly indicated Defendant
Super Hype Publishing as the publisher of the Led Zeppelin catalog. However,
apparently at some point in time, with Defendants consent, Flames of Albion Music
Limited became a successor in interested of Defendant Super Hype Publishing.
Defendants did not disclose this information until late January 2016, and now seek
to use their omission as a shield against Plaintiff.
1
3
Likewise, neither Defendants nor the Entities can credibly claim any unfair
prejudice as a result of the proposed amendment. The Entities are intrinsically
connected with the Defendants. In fact, these Entities were formed for the sole
purpose of benefiting the Defendants so that they can minimize liability and
optimize their profits derived from the infringing work. Defendants and Entities
have the same interests and are likely to have the same counsel. Although Plaintiff
may file a new case against these Entities, allowing Plaintiffs to add them as
additional defendants in this case would ensure Plaintiffs claims would be litigated
in an efficient and non-duplicative manner.
10
Accordingly, Plaintiff respectfully submits that, pursuant to Rule 15(a)(2), the
11
Court grant the instant motion to amend.
12
II.
13
FACTUAL BACKGROUND
This is an action for copyright infringement arising out of Defendants
14
unauthorized exploitation of Plaintiffs copyrighted material, Taurus, which was
15
unlawfully copied in Defendants infringing work Stairway to Heaven. The
16
complaint was filed on May 31, 2014; and a First Amended Complaint on October
17
10, 2014.
18
Plaintiff relied on copyright registrations and other public records relating to
19
the infringing work in order to determine the proper defendants in this case.
20
Defendants initial disclosure and other initial document production failed to
21
identify any other parties with interest in the infringing work. To Plaintiffs
22
surprise, a few weeks ago, Defendants produced documents identifying eight new
23
entities with direct interests in the infringing work.
24
Defendants initial disclosures did not indicate any other potential parties that
25
could have an interest in this lawsuit, or, more specifically, that any other party
26
could have any information relating to profits and losses of the infringing work. To
27
the contrary, their sole reference was to Ms. Joan Hudson, who was identified as the
28
individual Defendants accountant and as someone that may have information

4
1
2
related to their individual expenses.

The facts as to when and how Plaintiff first discovered the identity of the
Entities are recited and explained in the Declarations of Francis Malofiy and Glen
Kulik submitted herewith. Those declarations testify to the following.
The first chance that Plaintiff had to even begin to identify the Entities was
after December 29, 2016, when Defendants untimely provided approximately
40,000 pages of discovery. Discovery requests were previously served on
Defendants on October 13, 2015, making the documents due on November 13, 2015.
However, Defendants refused to provide any discovery as to damages until a
10
stipulated protective order was signed, despite never moving for an extension. The
11
protective order was signed only on December 28, 2015. Defendants served the
12
damages discovery the next day on December 29, 2015.
13
As there were 40,000 pages of documents, sifting through these documents
14
took a considerable amount of time. Moreover, supplemental answers to Plaintiffs
15
interrogatories on damages were provided even later, on January 5, 2016 for the
16
individual defendants and January 26, 2016 for the corporate defendants. It was on
17
these supplemental answers that many of the Entities were identified for the first
18
time, but their roles were still unclear. Further, deficiencies in these supplemental
19
answers hindered Plaintiffs understanding of the complicated business structure
20
used by Defendants to reap the benefits of the infringing work and limit their
21
liability. For example, when referring Plaintiff to the relevant documents in the
22
40,000 page production, Defendants referenced tens of thousands of pages at one
23
time, a direct violation of FRCP 33(d), which mandates that when answering
24
interrogatories by referencing business documents, the references have to be of a
25
sufficient particularity. These generic references to tens of thousands of pages
26
simply do not satisfy FRCP 33(d), and in any case made it close to impossible to
27
speedily comb through the production. The Warner/Chappell answer directed
28
Plaintiff to examine documents 5,000 to 35,000.

5
Nevertheless, because the individual defendants personally verified their
supplemental answers, Plaintiff believed they were the individuals who would have
requisite knowledge of the facts that were contained within the interrogatories.
Plaintiff intended to question the individual defendants at their depositions about this
information that they had verified. However, at their depositions the last one
occurring on January 29, 2016 despite Plaintiffs insistence that it take place earlier
the individual defendants professed to be completely ignorant of their financial
situations and stated that they had deliberately done no preparation for their
depositions. They instead referred Plaintiff to Ms. Joan Hudson, their accountant.
10
The initial disclosures of Defendants, however, never claimed that Hudson had any
11
knowledge of the individual defendants overall finances and critically their
12
business entities which Plaintiff now seeks to add, through which all their profits are
13
funneled. Instead, the initial disclosures only claimed that she had knowledge of
14
their expenses.
15
By that time, it was apparent that Defendants were not going to produce Ms.
16
Joan Hudson and they explicitly stated as much at a January 29, 2016 meet and
17
confer in London, England held after Plants deposition. Plaintiffs counsel even
18
offered to extend the UK deposition trip in order to be able to depose Ms. Joan
19
Hudson and/or review documents in her possession and control. Defendants
20
adamantly refused.
21
Near the end of January 2016, with the supplemental answers for the
22
corporate defendants, Defendants finally produced a profit and loss statement which
23
is the key document which specifies how to interpret the 40,000 production.
24
However, even then Defendants misidentified the documents bates number, further
25
delaying Plaintiffs investigation. Following this, the depositions of the corporate
26
designees for the corporate defendants took place on February 9 and 10, 2016. It was
27
at this deposition that Plaintiff was finally able to interrogate employees of the
28
defendants who understand the extraordinarily complicated corporate ownership

6
schemes arranged by Defendants. Specifically, during Defendant Warner/Chappells
deposition Plaintiff was informed for the first time that Defendant Warner/Chappell
does not enter into contracts in its own name. Rather, it uses one of three separate
entities depending on whether the artist is signed to ASCAP, BMI, or SESAC.2
Since Led Zeppelin is signed to ASCAP, Defendant Warner/Chappell uses WB
Music (one of the Entities Plaintiffs seek to add to this action) as its publishing
company. Not surprising, during deposition Warner/Chappell representative could
not confirm whether WB Music has any offices or employees, even whether or not
he was an employee of Defendant Warner/Chappell or proposed party WB Music.
10
Simply put: WB Music is nothing but a tool used by Defendant Warner/Chappell to
11
enter into dealings with Led Zeppelin.
12
To summarize, Defendants never identified the Entities on their initial
13
disclosures. Defendants delayed producing damages discovery until the very end of
14
December 2015. The production was 40,000 pages and was very difficult to
15
analyze, in particular to Plaintiffs counsel which is a small law firm with just two
16
lawyers. A week after producing the 40,000 pages, Defendants provided
17
supplemental answers verified by the individual defendants. A month later at the end
18
of January 2016 supplemental answers were provided for the corporate defendants,
19
along with the crucial profit and loss statement. It was on these supplemental
20
answers that many of the Entities were identified for the first time. On January 29,
21
2016 defense counsel acknowledged that the Entities had a direct role in the
22
exploitation of Stairway to Heaven. Lastly, the corporate defendants were deposed
23
on February 9 and 10, 2016, and definitively explained the interaction and working
24
relationship of all of the Entities and Defendants.
25
It is now apparent that although Defendants had knowledge of the relevance
26
of the Entities to this action, they purposefully avoided and delayed disclosing any
27
28
Song writers are typically signed into one of these three entities.
7
information that could alert Plaintiff to the fact that the public records were
outdated. For example, according to the copyright registrations, Defendant Super
Hype Publishing is the correct party and copyright claimant of the Led Zeppelin
catalog of roughly 87 songs. However, it is now clear that at some point in time, at
Defendants direction, Flames of Albion Limited became a successor in interest of
Defendant Super Hype Publishing. Nonetheless, Defendants document production
regarding the copyright registrations wrongly indicated that Defendant Super Hype
Publishing remains the publisher for the Led Zeppelin catalog.

Defendants have a direct involvement with the Entities WB Music is a
9
10
conduit through which Defendant Warner/Chappell Music, Inc. does business with
11
any artist who is affiliated with ASCAP. (Kulik Decl., para. 10.) At the corporate
12
deposition of Warner/Chappell Music, Inc., it was clear that it is a mere device in
13
name only and that employees of Warner/Chappell Music do all the work. (Id.,
14
para. 10.) Defendants knew all along of the relevance of WB Music to this case.
15
Defendants purposefully omitted such information. They now seek to use their
16
omission as a shield to Plaintiffs claims. After the close of discovery, Defendants
17
for the first time, contend that the Entities are the correct defendants. This Court
18
should not allow Defendants to benefit from their discovery violations and improper
19
litigation tactics.
20
III.
PLAINTIFFS PROPOSED AMENDMENT MEETS THE
21
REQUIREMENTS OF RULE 15
22
Plaintiff seeks leave to amend its FAC to add the Entities as additional
23
defendants in this suit. The Entities are intrinsically connected with current
24
Defendants and have played an essential role in receiving and distributing funds
25
derived from Defendants exploitation of the infringing work. Rule 15(a) sets a
26
liberal standard for amendment. As indicated by the Ninth Circuit, this policy is to
27
be applied with extreme liberality. Owens, 244 F.3d at 712 (citing Morongo Band
28
of Mission Indians v. Rose, 893 F.2d 1074, 1079 (9th Cir.1990). All inferences
8
should be drawn in favor of granting the motion. Griggs v. Pace Am. Group, Inc.,
170 F.3d 877, 880 (9th Cir.1999).
Courts generally consider four factors when evaluating a plaintiffs request to
amend a complaint: (1) bad faith or dilatory motive; (2) undue delay; (3) prejudice
to the opposing party; and (4) futility of the proposed amendment. Forman v. Davis,
371 U.S. 178, 182 (1962); Lockheed Martin Corp. v. Network Solutions, Inc., 194
F.3d 980, 986 (9th Cir. 1999). Each of these four factors support Plaintiffs request
for leave to amend.
Plaintiff has shown good faith. Plaintiff responsibly and in good faith
10
relied on public records and on information provided by Defendants to
11
determine the parties reaping benefits from the exploitation of the
12
infringing work. Although Defendants knew all along that these
13
documents and information were outdated, they purposefully delayed
14
producing documents which identified the Entities until the last possible
15
moments of discovery, which, they now conveniently contend are the
16
correct defendants in this case.
17
Plaintiffs amendment is timely. The first chance defendants had to
18
identify the Entities was in mid-to-late January 2016. It was only on
19
January 29, 2016 that defense counsel conceded that the Entities actually
20
had a stake in the infringing work and consequently were benefiting from
21
it. It was only on February 9 and 10, 2016 that Plaintiff was able to
22
depose corporate designees about the Entities and their roles in the
23
exploitation of Stairway to Heaven. Plaintiff has attempted to resolve the
24
issue with Defendants. However, given their refusal to stipulate to the
25
amendment, Plaintiff was forced to prepare this Motion, the SAC
26
concurrently with the on-going litigation work in this case, which
27
includes depositions, designation of experts and other trial preparation
28
tasks.
9
Plaintiffs amendment will not prejudice Defendants or their Entities.
The Entities are intrinsically connected with the Defendants. In fact,
these Entities were formed for the purpose of maximizing Defendants
profits derived from their infringing work. Defendants and Entities have
the same interests and are likely to have the same counsel.
Defendants cannot meet the very high burden of showing futility in
Plaintiffs SAC. Defendants themselves claim the Entities to be the
correct defendants in this case and although Plaintiffs may file a
separate action, granting Plaintiffs amendment will promote judicial
10
efficiency and a speedy resolution of the dispute between the parties.
11
A.
12
The factors of good faith and undue delay substantially overlap. See e.g.,
13
Wright & Miller, Federal Practice and Procedure, 1487 (When the court inquires
14
into the good faith of the moving party, it typically will take account of the movants
15
delay in seeking the amendment.) Courts also consider whether the proposed
16
amendment is interposed for some improper purpose, such as to affect the Courts
17
jurisdiction or for reasons of litigation tactics. See id. (if the Court determines that
18
the amendment was asserted in bad faith, as for example, when plaintiff attempts to
19
destroy the federal courts removal jurisdiction over the case by altering the
20
complaint so that the case will be remanded, the court may not allow the
21
amendment.) Here, Defendants cannot make any showing that Plaintiff has acted
22
in anything but good faith in pursuing this amendment. The proposed amendment
23
will not affect this Courts jurisdiction over this matter, and Plaintiff has no tactical
24
advantage to gain through this amendment. To the contrary, it is Defendants that
25
seek to gain a tactical advantage from their failure to promptly disclose the identity
26
of the Entities, which they conveniently now contend to be the correct defendants.
27
Plaintiff responsibly and in good faith relied on public records and documents
28
Plaintiff Acted In Good Faith and Has Timely Moved To Amend.
which were produced early in the case to identify the proper parties to this case.
10
Defendants never identified the Entities in their initial disclosures and Plaintiff had
no reason to question the official records as they were also produced by Defendants
early in the litigation. At no time, until a few weeks ago, did Defendants mention or
disclose any documents indicating that there were other entities, in addition to the
named Defendants, which held an interest in the infringing work.
The first chance that Plaintiff had to remotely identify the Entities was
December 29, 2016, when Defendants untimely provided approximately 40,000
pages of discovery. Plaintiffs counsel, as a small firm with only two lawyers,
diligently worked in analyzing such voluminous record. However, many of the
10
Entities were not mentioned on those 40,000 pages of discovery. It wasnt until
11
January 26, 2016, about two weeks before the discovery deadline, that defense
12
counsel finally produced the most important document, a profit and loss statement,
13
which clearly highlighted the involvement of the Entities in the exploitation of the
14
infringing work.
15
Accordingly, it is plain that Plaintiff has acted with good faith in relying on
16
public records and other documents produced by Defendants early in the litigation,
17
and has not unduly delayed the instant motion to amend. It wasnt until a few weeks
18
ago that Defendants first produced documents identifying the Entities. Thus, there
19
was no delay on Plaintiffs part because it was relying on public available
20
information and Defendants discovery responses. See DCD Programs, Ltd. v.
21
Leighton, 833 F.2d 183, 187 (9th Cir. 1987) (finding no bad faith and affirming
22
grant to leave to amend where plaintiff sought to develop evidence of wrongful
23
conduct before asserting claims); Qualcomm, Inc. v. Motorola, Inc., 989 F. Supp.
24
1048, 1050 (N.D. Cal. 1997) (finding no undue delay where the plaintiffs ongoing
25
investigation and discovery had revealed sufficient information upon which to base
26
new claims for relief).
27
28
11
B.
2
3
The SAC Will Not Prejudice Defendants or the Entities They Use
To Aid Their Infringing Actions.
Defendants bear the burden of establishing that prejudice will result from
Plaintiffs amendment. See Eminence Capital, LLC v. Aspeon, Inc., 316 F.3d 1048,
1052 (9th Cir. 2003). Defendants cannot possibly make such a showing. As noted
previously, Defendants all along have been aware that the public records and initial
documents which Plaintiff was relying on were outdated. The information regarding
the identity and the role played by the Entities in exploiting the infringing work,
until a few weeks ago, was in Defendants sole possession and thus inaccessible to
10
Plaintiff. Most importantly, the Entities are owned, controlled and operated by the
11
current Defendants, who use the Entities to collect and distribute funds from their
12
copyright infringement work. The Entities interests are aligned with the
13
Defendants, and thus have been protected in this action. Although Defendants may
14
claim otherwise, it is highly likely that if the Entities were added to this action, they
15
would be represented by the same counsel who represents current Defendants in this
16
matter.
17
18
19
C.
The SAC States Valid Claims Against the Entities and Granting
Leave To Amend Will Promote Judicial Efficiency.
The final factor considered by Courts under Federal Rule 15 is futility of the
20
proposed amendment. Where, as here, the amended complaint alleges a legally
21
sufficient claim for relief (namely Copyright Infringement and related equitable
22
relief), leave to amend should be granted. See Miller v. Rvkoff-Sexton Inc., 845 F.2d
23
209, 214 (9th Cir. 1988). A substantive evaluation of the merits of Plaintiffs
24
allegations, however, would be improper on a motion for leave to amend. See
25
William Schwarzer, et al., Federal Civil Procedure Before Trial 8:422 (noting that,
26
[o]rdinarily, courts do not consider the validity of a proposed amended pleading in
27
deciding whether to grant leave to amend.)
28
Although here Plaintiff merely needs to show that it can allege sufficient
12
claims, and need not provide any supporting evidence, in this case, it is undisputed
that the individual Defendants use the Entities to funnel proceeds derived from their
infringing work. Specifically, the profit and loss statement produced by Defendants
clearly identify the entities as having a direct participation and interest in
administering and publishing the Led Zeppelin song catalog, including the infringing
work. Defense counsel admitted as much at the January 29, 2016 meet and confer
when he contended that the Entities were the correct parties. This is in addition to
the deposition of the corporate designees on February 9 and 10, 2016, who made
clear that these entities are parties and interest. These documents and depositions
10
reveal that the Entities directly benefited from the infringing work, as such, they are
11
essential parties to the proper calculation of damages in this case.
12
Additionally, granting leave to amend will promote judicial efficiency and
13
ensure the speedy resolution of all disputes between the parties. As previously
14
mentioned, Plaintiff will file an additional lawsuit naming these Entities as
15
defendants based on the recent uncovered evidence that the Entities are directly
16
involved in funneling funds derived from the infringing work. However, if this
17
Court were to grant Plaintiff leave to amend, Plaintiff would need not file the second
18
lawsuit as there would be no need to proceed in litigating the dispute in two separate
19
forums. Thus, Plaintiff respectfully submits that the amendment will promote
20
judicial efficiency and ensure the speedy adjudication of all disputes between the
21
parties.
22
IV.
23
CONCLUSION
For the foregoing reasons, Plaintiff respectfully request that the Court grant
24
the instant motion to amend.
25
Dated: February 25, 2016
26
27
FRANCIS ALEXANDER, LLC

Francis Alexander Malofiy, Esq.
28
13
EXHIBIT 1
{00283975;1}
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
Francis Malofiy, Esq.

Francis Alexander, LLC
280 N. Providence Rd. | Suite 105
Media, PA 19063
T: (215) 500-1000; F: (215) 500-1005
Glen L. Kulik, Esq. (SBN 082170)
Kulik Gottesman & Siegel LLP
15303 Ventura Blvd., Suite 1400
Sherman Oaks, CA 91403
T: (310) 557-9200; F: (310) 557-0224
E: gkulik@kgslaw.com
11
12
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
MICHAEL SKIDMORE, as Trustee for the

RANDY CRAIG WOLFE TRUST,
Plaintiff
v.
Led Zeppelin
James Patrick Page
Robert Anthony Plant
John Paul Jones
Super Hype Publishing, Inc.
Warner Music Group Corp.
Parent of:
Warner/Chappell Music, Inc.
Atlantic Recording Corporation
Rhino Entertainment Company
WB Music Corp.
Flames of Albion Music Limited
Succubus Music Limited
Sons of Binion Limited
Super Hype Tapes Limited
Classicberry Limited
Trolcharm Limited
JPJ Communications Limited
Defendants
No.: 15-cv-3462-RGK-AGR
Case Filed:
May 31, 2014
Causes of Action:
Copyright Infringement
Right of Attribution
Falsification of
Rock n Roll History
Jury Trial Demanded
27
28
PLAINTIFFS SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT

1
PREAMBLE
2
3
1.
In the summer of 1967, Randy Craig Wolfe (aka Randy California),
discovered by Jimi Hendrix, was a founding member of the eclectic rock band Spirit
who pioneered the psychedelic rock sound. The band fused rock and jazz and
enhanced the audio palette by incorporating mind-bending and mood-altering effects
such as the Etherwave-Theremin, delay, and distortion into their recorded songs and
live performances.
2.
In January 1968 Spirit released a self-titled album named Spirita top
10
40 Billboard charting album. On that album was a unique 2 minute and 37 second
11
instrumental titled Taurus which has a distinct-plucked guitar line and melody.
12
Little did anyone know at the time, 17-year old Randy had created what would
13
become some of the most famous guitar work in the history of music.
14
3.
Late in 1968, a then new band named Led Zeppelin began touring in the
15
United States, opening for Spirit. It was during this time that Jimmy Page, Led
16
Zeppelins guitarist, grew familiar with Taurus and the rest of Spirits catalog.
17
Page stated in interviews that he found Spirit to be very good and that the bands
18
performances struck him on an emotional level.
19
4.
Jimmy Pages use of the Etherwave-Theremin, and other psychedelic-
20
type audio effects which helped give Led Zeppelin its distinctive soundespecially
21
prominent in Whole Lotta Lovewas inspired by seeing California effectively
22
use these types of audio-enhancing effects on tour.
23
5.
Within days after opening for Spirit, Led Zeppelin quickly began to
24
cover Spirits songsincorporated the song Fresh Garbage from Spirits self-
25
titled album into their live sets. Fresh Garbage was on the same album side as
26
Taurus.
27
28
6.
A year after touring with Spirit, Page allegedly wrote the most famous
rock song of all timeStairway to Heavenby fireside in a remote cottage in

2
Wales called Bron-Yr-Aur; it was released in 1971. It is no coincidence that the
iconic notes to Stairway to Heaven, that have enthralled generations of fans, sound
almost exactly the same as Californias ethereal yet classical guitar composition in
Taurus.
7.
In 1996 Randy had a chance to have his say about the similarities
between Taurus and Stairway to Heaven in his song-by-song liner notes for the
1996 reissue of Spirit, when he wrote:

People always ask me why Stairway to Heaven sounds
exactly like Taurus, which was released two years earlier. I
know Led Zeppelin also played Fresh-Garbage in their live
set. They opened up for us on their first American tour.
8
9
10
11
8.
However, in 1996 (printed in 1997), shortly before Randys death,
12
when asked directly about why Taurus and Stairway to Heaven sounded similar,
13
he said:
Well, if you listen to the two songs, you can make your own
judgment. Its an exact Id say it was a rip-off. And the
guys made millions of bucks on it and never said, Thank
you, never said, Can we pay you some money for it? Its
kind of a sore point with me. Maybe some day their
conscience will make them do something about it. I dont
know. There are funny business dealings between record
companies, managers, publishers, and artists. But when artists
do it to other artists, theres no excuse for that. Im mad!
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
See Jeff McLaughlin, Spirits Still Willing: A Conversation with Randy

California, Listener Magazine, Winter 1997, p. 51.
9.
When Jimmy Page was interviewed and asked When you were
borrowing from classic blues songs on the first two albums, did you ever think it
would catch up to you? Page answered this question as follows:
You mean getting sued? Well, as far as my end of it goes, I
always tried to bring something fresh to anything that I used. I
always made sure to come up with some variation. In fact, I
think in most cases, you would never know what the
original source could be. Maybe not in every case but in
3
most cases. So most of the comparisons rest on the lyrics. And

Robert was supposed to change the lyrics, and he didnt always
do that which is what brought on most of the grief. They
couldnt get us on the guitar parts of the music, but they nailed
us on the lyrics.
2
3
4
We did, however, take some liberties, I must say [laughs]. But

never mind; we did try to do the right thing, it blew up in our
faces
5
6
7
See Brad Tolinski with Greg DiBenedetto, Page Delves into Led Zeppelins Rich
Past, Guitar World (May 1993).
10.
This is hardly the first time Zeppelin has been accused of lifting their
10
most famous songs; in fact, Zeppelin has a deep-rooted history of lifting
11
composition from blues artists and other songwriters who they have repeatedly
12
failed to credit. Heres a partial list:
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
4
11.
Led Zeppelin is undeniably one of the greatest bands in history, and
their musical talent is boundless. However, what happened to Randy California and
Spirit is wrong. Led Zeppelin needs to do the right thing and give credit where credit
is due.1 Randy California deserves writing credit for Stairway to Heaven and to
take his place as an author of Rocks greatest song.
*****
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
1
26
27
28
Funds obtained from a favorable resolution of this lawsuit will go to the Randy Craig Wolfe Trust,
which is run by Trustee Michael Skidmore, who has selflessly dedicated years to preserving and
promoting Randys spirit, including releasing 12 previously unreleased albums featuring Randy
California. Mick and the Trust preserve Randys memory by supporting the musical aspirations of
children in public schools and by developing Randy Californias music portfolio, the proceeds of which
are provided to buy children in need musical instruments.
FACTS
2
3
Randy California is Discovered by Jimi Hendrix
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
12.
Randy California was a guitar virtuoso who began playing the guitar at
an early age. None other than the great Jimi Hendrix recognized his talent when
Randy was just 15 years old in 1966 playing in a music shop in NYC.
13.
Hendrix recruited Randy to play in his band Jimmy James and the Blue
Flames. They played together in Greenwich Village and Randy was invited by
Hendrix to join the newly formed Jimi Hendrix Experience in London. Randy did
not go with Hendrix because his family was concerned that Randy was just a
teenager and needed to finish his schooling.
14.
It was Jimi Hendrix who nicknamed Randy Wolfe Randy California,
a pseudonym Randy used for the rest of his life.

15.
Not only did Jimi Hendrix recognize the talents of Randy, but so did
Jimmy Page, having been influenced by Randys use of the Theremin, delay, and
distortionas well as other mind-bending and mood-altering psychedelic effects
that are now common in rock and pop music.
Formation of Spirit
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
16.
In 1967, guitarist Randy Craig Wolfe (aka Randy California), started a
band named Spirit with four other musicians: Mark Andes (bass), John Jay
Ferguson (vocals), John Locke (keyboard), and Ed Cassidy (drums). Randy was just
16-years old at the time.
17.
Spirit was an eclectic band with an amazing group of musicians that
developed the psychedelic rock sound. Spirit was one of the first bands that fused
rock and jazz by enhancing the audio palette by incorporating mind-mending and
mood-altering effects such as the theremin, delay, and distortion into their songs and
live sets.
6
1
2
3
18.
Spirit released its self-titled debut album Spirit in January 1968, which
broke Billboards Top 40.

19.
After the release of the album Spirit, Spirit went on to release more than
twenty albumsalbeit in different configurations of the bandincluding the
critically acclaimed The Family that Plays Together, Clear, and Twelve Dreams of
Dr. Sardonicus (which went Gold).
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
Creation of the Song Taurus

20.
On Spirits self-titled album was a unique 2 minute and 37 second
instrumental titled Taurus which was written by Randy California in the summer
of 1967. The song has an ethereal, distinct plucked-guitar line and melody. Randy
wrote the song as a tribute to his bandmates who he loved and cared for deeply
some of them sharing the astrological Taurus sign.
21.
Spirit played Taurus at almost all of their concerts in the late 1960s
and at many of their concerts in the early 1970s, where the song played a key role in
the bands set list. The song often followed an up-beat and heavier tune, and this
allowed the fans an emotional and expressive break in the set.
Spirit and Randy Sign Songwriting & Recording Contracts

22.
On August 29, 1967, Randy (16 years old) signed an Exclusive
Songwriters and Composers Agreement with Hollenbeck Music.

23.
The song Taurus was written by Randy before the August 29, 1967
Songwriters Agreement and is not and cannot be considered a work for hire.
24.
On August 29, 1967, Randy signed an artist recording contract with
Ode Records, Inc., along with Mark Andes (19 years old), Jay Ferguson (20 years
old), John Locke (24 years old), and Ed Cassidy (44 year old).
25.
By the express terms of the Songwriters Agreement and Recording
Contract the contracts were not valid unless approved by the court.
26.
No court ever approved these contracts and are therefore void.

7
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
27.
Furthermore, the age of majority in California in 1967 was 21 (Stats.
1973, ch. 278, 1, p. 674 [former Civil Code section 25.1]).

28.
Randy, Mark, and Jay were minors at the time these contracts were
signed and they are void.

29.
Randy, Mark, and Jay did not have the legal capacity to enter into these
contracts and are therefore void.

30.
In addition, all assignments and subsequent assignments of the rights in
these contracts are void as they were not approved by a court.

31.
Moreover, both the Songwriters Agreement and Recording Contract
have been superseded in many ways by the provisions of the Copyright Act of 1976.
32.
To the extent Hollenbeck Music claims to retain any interest in
12
Taurus, it has abandoned, forfeited, and waived these rights by failing to protect or
13
enforce the Taurus copyright.
14
33.
The publisher who allegedly contracted with Randy, Hollenbeck Music,
15
has no rights or interests in Taurus because the contracts are void for a number of
16
reasons, some of which have been already stated.
17
34.
The copyright registration of Taurus lists Randy California as the
18
author and copyright claimant. Taurus was registered with the Copyright Office
19
on 02/05/1968 (Reg. No. EU0000035222), and renewed on 01/11/1996 (Reg. No.
20
RE0000725888).
21
Led Zeppelin was Opening Act for Spirit in 1968
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
35.
In late 1968, a British band named Led Zeppelin played its first concert
in the United States.

36.
Not yet immortal rock legends, Led Zeppelin opened for Spirit on
December 26, 1968. Spirit played Taurus at this show, as it did in most of its
concerts that year.
37.
In 1969, Spirit and Led Zeppelin performed together several more
times. Spirit played Taurus at many of these shows.

8
38.
Jimmy Page and Led Zeppelin were fans of Spirit, were aware of their
album, and were influenced on an emotional level by their performances and
recordings, so much so that they would go to watch Spirit perform in concert.
39.
One such example is on February 6, 1970, when Robert Plantand
possibly other members of Led Zeppelinattended a Spirit concert. Following the
show, members of Spirit and Plant met up to play Snooker in a pub. Later that night
Plant was injured in a car crash and hospitalized for facial injuries.
Spirit Influenced Led Zeppelin and Jimmy Page
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
40.
Zeppelins guitarist, defendant James Patrick Page (Jimmy Page),
commented in a 1972 interview that Spirits performances were very good and
struck him on an emotional level. See Pete Frame, My Back Pages, Record
Collector Magazine p.74 (May 2008), originally printed in Zig Zag Magazine
(1972).
41.
Due to the bands close relationship in 1968 and 1969, and Pages
comments, it is beyond reasonable dispute that Defendants heard Spirit perform

Taurusnot only in concert but also from Spirits album.
42.
Not only did Zeppelin hear Spirit perform Taurus and other original
songs, Zeppelin actually covered Spirits song, titled Fresh Garbage in a medley
called As Long As I Have You, at concerts during this time.
43.
The book Get the Led Out: How Led Zeppelin Became the Biggest
Band in the World by Denny Somach details how Zeppelin started to use Spirits
material.
December 26 All four members of Led Zeppelin met up in
Denver, Colorado, where their first show on American soil was
to take place. They were opening for the bands Spirit and
Vanilla Fudge. Led Zeppelin was not even listed on the bill for
this show.
....
28
9
December 30 A concert with Vanilla Fudge and Led Zeppelin

took place at Gonzaga University in Spokane, Washington . . . .
An audience tape of Led Zeppelins performance from that
showthe earliest audience tape of a Led Zeppelin show in
circulation among bootleg collectorsreveals that John Paul
Jones had already begun playing the bass line that Spirits
Mark Andes played during the song Fresh Garbage. The
two groups had shared the bill in Denver four days earlier.
Jones was using it in part of a heavy rock medley Led Zeppelin
extended on a near-nightly basis over the following months.
Page 19.
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
44.
Merely 4 days after opening for Spirit, Zeppelin had already lifted
10
Spirits material for their live sets. Zeppelin continued to use Spirits song Fresh
11
Garbage in many of their live shows in 1968 through 1970 including it as part of a
12
medley.
13
45.
Spirit and Randy Californias influence on Defendants was by no
14
means limited to one or two songs. After having witnessed Randy use the
15
Etherwave-Theremin in concert, defendant Page was determined toand eventually
16
purchase onewhich in addition to delay and distortion-type effects, helped Page
17
develop Zeppelins distinctive unearthly and psychedelic sounds.
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
46.
In When Giants Walked the Earth: A Biography of Led Zeppelin by
Mick Wall, it is noted:

Sometimes [Zeppelin] would even purloin material from one of
the other bands on the bill, as when Spirit joined the Vanilla
Fudge tour for a few dates and Zeppelin took to incorporating
into their set snatches of Fresh Garbage from the debut,
eponymously titled Spirit album. Page was also taken with
Spirit singer-guitarist Randy Californias use of a theremin,
which he had mounted atop his amplifier or sometimes down by
his foot pedals. . . . . It wasnt until he saw Randy California
using one that he decided he wanted one too, buying his first
theremin in New York at the start of the bands second US tour
later that year and initially using it to enhance the extended jamsection finale of Dazed and Confused, and later a more famous
effect on the recording of Whole Lotta Love. (Vanilla Fudge
drummer Carmine Appice would later claim that Page also
10
adapted a section of another, less well-known Spirit number,

Taurus, from their first album, for the five trademark chords of
Stairway to Heaven, an allegation we will return to in due
course.). Pages 99100.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
47.
Led Zeppelin recorded the album Led Zeppelin in October 1968, before
having encountered Spirit and Randy California.

48.
Led Zeppelin conceived of and recorded Led Zeppelin II in 1969, after
playing with Spirit.

49.
There is a noticeable difference between the two albums as Led
Zeppelin II made heavy use of psychedelic audio effects, delay, and distortion
10
especially in Whole Lotta Lovethat characterized Spirit and Californias music.
11
These effects were largely absent from Led Zeppelin I, and almost entirely absent
12
from Pages prior recordings before Led Zeppelin.
13
50.
There is thus an overwhelming amount of evidence that Spirit
14
contributed not insubstantially to the development of Led Zeppelin as a band
15
helping them create and carve out their distinct soundand especially with the song
16
Stairway to Heaven.
17
18
19
Jimmy Page & Robert Plant Write Stairway to Heaven

51.
Having toured with Spirit, and after Zeppelin completed their fifth
20
American concert tour in April 1970, Jimmy Page and Robert Plant sat fireside in a
21
remote cottage in Wales called Bron-Yr-Aur and allegedly wrote the song Stairway
22
to Heaven.
23
52.
Defendant Jimmy Page is on record commenting how he allegedly
24
created Stairway to Heaven. In short, Page has stated that he always kept a
25
cassette recorder around, and the idea for Stairway to Heaven came together from
26
bits of taped music:
27
28
I had these pieces, these guitar pieces, that I wanted to put

together. I had a whole idea of a piece of music that I really
wanted to try and present to everybody and try and come to
11
terms with. Bit difficult really, because it started on acoustic,

and as you know it goes through to the electric parts. But we
had various run-throughs [at Headley Grange] where I was
playing the acoustic guitar and jumping up and picking up the
electric guitar. Robert was sitting in the corner, or rather
leaning against the wall, and as I was routining the rest of the
band with this idea and this piece, he was just writing. And all
of a sudden he got up and started singing, along with another
run-through, and he must have had 80% of the words there ... I
had these sections, and I knew what order they were going to go
in, but it was just a matter of getting everybody to feel
comfortable with each gear shift that was going to be coming.
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
See National Public Radio, Guitar Legend Jimmy Page (June 2, 2003).
53.
and Plant returned from the Welsh cottage:

Page and Plant [came back] from the Welsh mountains with the
guitar intro and verse. I literally heard it in front of a roaring
fire in a country manor house! I picked up a bass recorder and
played a run-down riff which gave us an intro, then I moved
into a piano for the next section, dubbing on the guitars.
13
14
15
16
17
18
Defendant Jones claims he first heard Stairway to Heaven after Page
See Chris Welch, Led Zeppelin, pp. 6061 Orion Books (1994).
54.
The song began recording at Island Records studio in London in
December of 1970, and was completed in 1971.
19
55.
20
Led Zeppelin IV.
21
56.
22
23
24
25
The song was released on an untitled album in 1971, commonly called

It quickly became Led Zeppelins most famous song, and is universally
acknowledged as one of the greatest songs ever written.

57.
Parts of Stairway to Heaven, instantly recognizable to the music fans
across the world, sound almost identical to significant portions of Taurus.

58.
Any reasonable observer, when comparing Taurus and Stairway to
26
Heaven, must conclude thatat the very leastsignificant portions of the songs
27
are nearly identical.
28
12
59.
Stairway to Heaven was registered with the Copyright Office on
01/20/1972 (Reg. No. EU0000301137), and renewed on 01/05/2000 (Reg. No.
RE0000819939).
*****
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
13
THE PARTIES
2
3
Skidmore
Michael Skidmore
60.
Plaintiff Michael Skidmore is the Trustee for the Randy Craig Wolfe
61.
Skidmore is a resident of Quincy, Massachusetts.
62.
Randy Craig Wolfe died in 1997 saving his son from being swept out to
4
5
Trust.
sea. The Randy Craig Wolfe Trust was established by Bernice C. Pearl, the mother
of Randy Craig Wolfe, as conservator of his estate by court order on February 19,
10
2002. Upon her death, Michael Skidmore, in his capacity as Trustee, continued the
11
administration of the Trust.
12
63.
Mick and Trust preserve Randys memory by supporting the musical
13
aspirations of children in public schools and by developing Randy Californias
14
music portfolio, the proceeds of which buy children in need musical instruments.
15
16
17
64.
After the Trust was formed Randys son received a large sum of money
as a settlementwhich allowed the Trust to continue helping children.

65.
The Randy Craig Wolfe Trust retains 100% of the interests to Randys
18
intellectual property, inclusive of but not limited to copyrights, musical
19
compositions and sound recordings, and all pecuniary benefits related thereto
20
inclusive of the right to the copyrights, interests, and benefits from the exploitation
21
of the song Taurus.
22
66.
Funds obtained from a favorable resolution of this lawsuit will go to the
23
Randy Craig Wolfe Trust, which is run by Trustee Mick Skidmore, who has
24
selflessly dedicated years to preserving and promoting Randys spirit, including
25
releasing 12 previously unreleased albums featuring Randy California.
26
Led Zeppelin
27
67.
28
Zeppelin
The English rock band Led Zeppelin formed in 1968. The band
consisted of Jimmy Page (guitarist), Robert Plant (singer), John Paul Jones (bassist
14
and keyboardist), and John Bonham (drummer). The group's guitar-driven sound,
rooted in blues and folk music, is considered by many to be a key influence in the
emergence of heavy metal.
68.
Originally called the New Yardbirds, Led Zeppelin signed with Atlantic
Records in 1968. Zeppelin achieved significant commercial success with albums
such as Led Zeppelin (1969), Led Zeppelin II (1969), Led Zeppelin III (1970), their
untitled fourth album (1971), Houses of the Holy (1973), and Physical Graffiti
(1975). Their fourth album, featuring "Stairway to Heaven," is revered by the
musical world and helped to cement the popularity of the group.
10
69.
Page composed most of Led Zeppelin's music early onin addition to
11
being the bands producerwhile Plant wrote the lyrics, including the words for
12
Stairway to Heaven. The latter half of the band's career saw a series of record-
13
breaking tours that earned them a reputation for excess and debauchery.
14
70.
Led Zeppelin are widely considered one of the most successful,
15
innovative and influential rock groups in history. All nine of the bands studio
16
albums reached the Billboard Top 10 with six peaking at number one. Rolling Stone
17
magazine described them as unquestionably one of the most enduring bands in rock
18
history. Inducted into the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame in 1995, the museums
19
biography states that they were as influential in that decade [the 1970s] as the
20
Beatles were in the prior one.
21
22
23
71.
Zeppelin infringed upon the composition of Taurus when band
members Page and Plant allegedly wrote Stairway to Heaven.

72.
Zeppelin profited from the infringement and exploitation of Taurus
24
when Led Zeppelin released Stairway to Heaven to the public and failed to credit,
25
compensate, or remunerate Randy.
26
27
28
73.
Zeppelin exploited the musical composition of Taurus without
authorization.
74.
Zeppelin exploited the musical composition of Stairway to Heaven.

15
75.
Zeppelin exploited the sound recording of Stairway to Heaven.
76.
On information and belief, Zeppelin does substantial, continuous, and
systematic business in the Eastern District of Pennsylvania.
James Patrick Page
5
6
77.
Page
Defendant James Patrick Page is the guitarist and the lead and founding
member of the rock band Led Zeppelin.
78.
Page is listed as a writer for the song Stairway to Heaven.
79.
Page infringed upon the composition of Taurus when he and Plant
9
10
allegedly wrote Stairway to Heaven.

80.
Page profited from the infringement and exploitation of Taurus when
11
Led Zeppelin released Stairway to Heaven to the public and failed to credit,
12
13
14
81.
Page exploited the musical composition of Taurus without
authorization.
15
82.
Page exploited the musical composition of Stairway to Heaven.
16
83.
Page exploited the sound recording of Stairway to Heaven.
17
84.
On information and belief, defendant Page resides in Kensington,
18
19
London, England and in the United States.

85.
On information and belief, Page does substantial, continuous, and
20
21
Robert Anthony Plant
Plant
22
86.
23
Zeppelin.
24
87.
Plant is listed as a writer of the song Stairway to Heaven.
25
88.
Plant infringed upon the composition of Taurus when he and Page
26
Defendant Robert Plant is the singer and member of the rock band Led
allegedly wrote Stairway to Heaven.
27
28
16
89.
Plant profited from the infringement and exploitation of Taurus when
Led Zeppelin released Stairway to Heaven to the public and failed to credit,
4
5
90.
Plant exploited the musical composition of Taurus without
authorization.
91.
Plant exploited the musical composition of Stairway to Heaven.
92.
Plant exploited the sound recording of Stairway to Heaven.
93.
On information and belief, defendant Plant resides in the United States
9
10
in Austin, Texas and in England.

94.
On information and belief, Plant does substantial, continuous, and
11
12
John Paul Jones
13
14
15
95.
Jones
Defendant John Paul Jones is the bassist and member of the rock band
Led Zeppelin.
96.
On information and belief, Jones aided and encouraged the
16
infringement of the composition of Taurus when Page and Plaint allegedly wrote
17
Stairway to Heaven.
18
97.
On information and belief, Jones profited from the infringement and
19
exploitation of Taurus when Led Zeppelin released Stairway to Heaven to the
20
public and failed to credit, compensate, or remunerate Randy.
21
22
98.
Jones exploited the musical composition of Taurus without
authorization.
Jones exploited the musical composition of Stairway to Heaven.
23
99.
24
100. Jones exploited the sound recording of Stairway to Heaven.
25
101. On information and belief, defendant Jones resides in England and in
26
27
28
the United States.

102. On information and belief, Jones does substantial, continuous, and
17
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
Super Hype
Super Hype Publishing, Inc.
103. Defendant Super Hype is a publishing company which exploits musical

worksmusical compositions.
104. Super Hype was formed and is 100% owned, operated, controlled, and
managed by defendant Page.
105. Super Hype is the publishing company responsible for publishing the
musical compositions of defendant Led Zeppelin and defendant Page.
106. Super Hype exploited the musical composition of Taurus without
authorization.
107. Super Hype exploited the musical composition of Stairway to
Heaven.
12
108. Super Hype exploited the sound recording of Stairway to Heaven.
13
109. On information and belief, Super Hype is a New York corporation.
14
110. Super Hypes catalog of songs is administered by defendant
15
16

111. Super Hype does substantial, continuous, and systematic business in the
17
Eastern District of Pennsylvania.
18
Warner Music Group Corp.
WMG
19
112. Defendant WMG is a large music industry powerhouse that provides all
20
services related thereto which comprise three main divisions: recording, publishing,
21
and artist services.
22
23
24
25
113. WMG owns defendants Warner/Chappell Music, Inc., Atlantic

Recording Corporation, and Rhino Entertainment Corporation.
114. WMG exploited the musical composition of Taurus without
authorization.
26
115. WMG exploited the musical composition of Stairway to Heaven.
27
116. WMG exploited the sound recording of Stairway to Heaven.
28
117. On information and belief, WMG is a Delaware corporation.

18
118. WMG is the parent of defendant Warner/Chappell Music, Inc.
119. WMG is the parent of defendant Atlantic Recording Corporation.
120. WMG is the parent of defendant Rhino Entertainment Company.
121. WMG does substantial, continuous, and systematic business in the
7
8
Warner/Chappell
122. Defendant Warner/Chappell is a global music publishing company that

exploits musical works.
123. Music publishing involves the acquisition of rights to, and licensing of,
10
musical compositions (as opposed to recordings) from songwriters, composers or
11
other rights holders.
12
124. Warner/Chappell holds one of the worlds largest collections of musical
13
compositions, ranging from well-known standards to new songs by emerging artists.
14
Warner/Chappell is home to a wide array of legendary songwriters and a rich catalog
15
of contemporary hits and influential standards. With a history that dates back more
16
than 200 years and offices in more than 40 countries, Warner/Chappell provides
17
expertise across a range of creative services and the most innovative opportunities
18
for songwriters and copyright holders.
19
125. Warner/Chappell currently publishes and administers music from Barry
20
Gibb, Beyonc, Bruno Mars, Eric Clapton, fun., Gamble & Huff, Green Day, JAY
21
Z, Katy Perry, Led Zeppelin, Lionsgate Films, Madonna, Miramax Films, Muse,
22
Radiohead, Red Hot Chili Peppers, R.E.M., Roc Nation, Stephen Sondheim, T.I.,
23
Timbaland, and Wayne Hector, among many others.
24
25
26
27
126. Warner/Chappell exploited the musical composition of Taurus

without authorization.
127. Warner/Chappell exploited the musical composition of Stairway to
Heaven.
28
19
1
2
128. Warner/Chappell exploited the sound recording of Stairway to

Heaven.
129. Warner/Chappell is a subsidiary of defendant WMG.
130. Defendant WMG is the parent of Warner/Chappell.
131. Warner/Chappell administers defendant Super Hypes catalog of songs.
132. On information and belief, Warner/Chappell is a Delaware corporation.
133. Warner/Chappell does substantial, continuous, and systematic business
in the Eastern District of Pennsylvania.
Atlantic Recording Corporation
Atlantic
10
134. Defendant Atlantic is a record company engaged in the business of
11
developing artists, and in the business of creating, manufacturing, selling, and
12
distributing musical works compositions and musical sound recordings.
13
135. Led Zeppelin, Page, Plant, Jones, and John Bonham (deceased
14
drummer) were all signed to Atlantic and Atlantic was the record company who
15
develop the band Led Zeppelin and assisted the band in creating, manufacturing,
16
selling, and distributing the musical compositions and sound recordings of Led
17
Zeppelin.
18
136. Atlantic manufactured, sold, and distributed Led Zeppelins fourth
19
album, known as Led Zeppelin IV, which included the musical composition and
20
sound recording of Stairway to Heaven which infringed upon the musical
21
composition of Taurus.
22
137. Atlantic owns the master recording(s) of the album Led Zeppelin IV.
23
138. Atlantic owns the master recording(s) of Stairway to Heaven.
24
139. Atlantic was founded in 1947 by Ahmet Ertegun and Herb Abramson
25
(later joined by Jerry Wexler, Nesuhi Ertegun, Tom Dowd, and Arif Mardin) as a
26
one-room operation in New York City that was dedicated to finding, recording and
27
promoting independent R&B and jazz. The label had its first hit single in 1949 with
28
Stick McGhee's "Drinkin' Wine Spo-Dee-O-Dee" and soon after was catapulted into
20
one of the pre-eminent companies in the rapidly evolving music industry. Today it
remains recognized and revered around the world as being synonymous with artistry
and quality.
140. Through the years, Atlantic recordings have had a profound impact on
the development of modern music, while entertaining and engaging listeners with
songs that have rooted themselves in our collective consciousness. Atlantic's rich
history is distinguished by an array of legendary artists who broke new ground and
set new musical standards, among them such icons as Ray Charles, Aretha Franklin,
John Coltrane, and Led Zeppelin.
10
141. Atlantic continues to be marked by musical diversity, embracing a
11
spectrum of chart-topping performers who span the contemporary pop, rock, R&B,
12
and hip-hop landscapes. Today the company is home to many of the world's most
13
popular recording artists, among them Bruno Mars, fun., Flo Rida, T.I., Wiz Khalifa,
14
Portugal. The Man, B.o.B., Halestorm, Trey Songz, James Blunt, Phil Collins, Death
15
Cab for Cutie, Lupe Fiasco, Kid Rock, Matchbox Twenty, Jason Mraz, O.A.R.,
16
Plies, Sean Paul, Shinedown, Staind, Rob Thomas and many more.
17
18
142. Atlantic exploited the musical composition of Taurus without

authorization.
19
143. Atlantic exploited the musical composition of Stairway to Heaven.
20
144. Atlantic exploited the sound recording of Stairway to Heaven.
21
145. Atlantic is a subsidiary of defendant WMG.
22
146. Defendant WMG is the parent of Atlantic.
23
147. On information and belief, Atlantic is a Delaware corporation.
24
148. Atlantic does substantial, continuous, and systematic business in the
25
26
Rhino
27
149. Defendant Rhino develops defendant WMGs vast catalog of
28
extraordinary artists in the United States, as well as providing support and assistance
21
to the company's frontline labels. The division, which includes Rhino Records,
WMG Custom Products, and WMG Film, Television & Commercial Licensing, also
develops new catalog-related business opportunities across Warner Music Group
and with third-party companies.
5
6
150. Rhino exploited the musical composition of Taurus without

authorization.
151. Rhino exploited the musical composition of Stairway to Heaven.
152. Rhino exploited the sound recording of Stairway to Heaven.
153. Rhino is a subsidiary of defendant WMG.
10
154. Defendant WMG is the parent of Rhino.
11
155. On information and belief, Rhino is a Delaware corporation.
12
156. Rhino does substantial, continuous, and systematic business in the
13
14
Albion
15
156a. Defendant Albion is a company jointly used by defendants Jimmy Page
16
and Robert Plant to collect and disburse funds associated with their publishing rights
17
derived from the infringing work, Stairway to Heaven.
18
Succubus
19
156b. Defendant Succubus is company used by Defendant Jimmy Page to
20
21
infringing work
22
Binion
23
156c. Defendant Binion is the company used by Defendant Robert Plant to
24
25
infringing work.
26
Super Hype Tapes
27
156d. Defendant Super Hype Tapes is company used jointly by Defendants
28
Jimmy Page, Robert Plant and John Paul Jones to collect and disburse funds
22
associated with their performance and artist royalties derived from the infringing
work.
3
4
156e. It is a successor company to defendant Super Hype Publishing.
Classicberry
156f. Defendant Classicberry is a company used by Defendant Jimmy Page to
Trolcharm Limited
Trolcharm
156g. Defendant Trolcham is a company used by Defendant Robert Plant to
10
11
12
JPJ
13
156h. Defendant JPJ is a company used by Defendant John Paul Jones to
14
15
16
WB Music Corp.
WB Music
17
156i. Defendant WB Music is a company that signed the publishing
18
agreement with defendant Flames of Albion on behalf of Warner Music Group for
19
the infringing song Stairway to Heaven. It is a subsidiary of Warner Music Group.
20
156j. It should be noted on the operative contract for the Led Zeppelin
21
catalogue signed by WB Music that defendant Warner/Chappell was identified as
22
the entity that would handle all matters and concerns regarding the publishing rights
23
for Led Zeppelin, including Stairway to Heaven.
24
156k. Upon information and belief, and based upon deposition testimony of
25
the FRCP 30(b)(6) designee for defendant Warner/Chappell, WB Music is a shell
26
company with no independent existence, duties, and functionswith the same
27
directors, officers, employees, and locationfrom defendant Warner/Chappell.
28
*****
23
157. On information and belief, each and every Defendant was an agent,
partner, representative, affiliate, employee, alter ego, or co-conspirator of each and
every other Defendant, and in doing the things alleged herein, each and every
Defendant was acting pursuant to such conspiracy and/or within the course and
scope of such agency, representation, affiliation, control or employment and was
acting with the consent, permission and authorization of the other Defendants.
Moreover, on information and belief, each Defendant who joined the conspiracy
after its formation ratified, adopted and is liable for all acts committed in furtherance
of the conspiracy including those committed before such Defendant joined the
10
conspiracy.
11
158. Whenever the Complaint refers to any act or acts of a Defendants, the
12
reference shall also be deemed to meant that the directors, officers, employees,
13
affiliates, controlling companies or agents of the responsible Defendants authorized
14
such act while actively engaged in the management, direction or control of the
15
affairs of Defendant, and each of them, and/or by persons who are the alter ego of
16
Defendants, or while acting within the scope of their agency, affiliation, control, or
17
employment. Whenever the Complaint refers to any act of Defendants, the
18
references shall be deemed to be the act of each Defendant, jointly and severally.
19
*****
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
24
1
2
3
4
JURISDICTION AND VENUE

159.
Plaintiff hereby incorporates by reference the preceding paragraphs and
repeats and realleges each of the allegations as if fully set forth here.
160. The infringement of Taurus has occurred by virtue of the commercial
exploitation of Stairway to Heaven which occurred, and continues to occur, in the
Eastern District of Pennsylvania, the United States, and throughout the world.
161. This action is brought as a copyright infringement case and related
claims; and therefore, subject matter jurisdiction lies within this Court, pursuant to
10
28 U.S.C. 1331 and 1338.
11
162. The Central District of California has personal jurisdiction over each
12
and every Defendant by virtue of (1) their specific contacts with this district
13
concerning Stairway to Heaven, and (2) their general, systematic, and continuous
14
business and music contacts with this district.
15
This Court Has Specific Jurisdiction Because Defendants Have Targeted
16
This District for Sales of the Infringing Song Stairway to Heaven
17
163. Defendants are subject to specific jurisdiction in this district because
18
they make millions of dollars from the Eastern District of Pennsylvania by directly
19
targeting this district for the exploitation of Stairway to Heaven through CD sales,
20
digital downloading, radio and television play, advertising, marketing, concert
21
performances, other performances, licensing, and otherwise targeting resident
22
individuals and businesses to profit off the exploitation of Stairway to Heaven.
23
164. Because Defendants knowingly and intentionally target this district for
24
album and song salesand various other advertising, marketing, licensing, and
25
promotional activities relating to the exploitation of the infringing song Stairway to
26
Heavenit is reasonably foreseeable to all Defendants that they would be subject
27
to suit in this district. They have availed themselves of the privilege of conducting
28
25
activities and business within this forum and are therefore subject to suit in this
forum.
This Court Has General Jurisdiction Because Defendants Exploit this
District and its Residents to Sell, Promote, Advertise, Perform, and
Merchandise their Music, Making Millions of Dollars in the Process
165. Defendants are subject to general jurisdiction because they make
millions of dollars from the Eastern District of Pennsylvania by exploiting all of
their songs through CD sales, digital downloads, radio and television play,
advertising, marketing, concert performances, other performances, licensing,
10
merchandising, book sales, T-shirt sales, poster sales and otherwise targeting
11
individuals and businesses in the Eastern District of Pennsylvania to sell their music
12
and related goods and services.
13
166. Sales of albums, songs, and concert tickets are the bread and butter of
14
Defendants daily business and are their core business. Because Defendants conduct
15
their core business in the Eastern District of Pennsylvania, and target this district and
16
state for exploitation of their music copyrights, their contacts are of both a quality
17
and quantity that clearly subjects them to general jurisdiction in Pennsylvania.
18
167. In addition, when Led Zeppelin performed Stairway to Heaven in
19
concert in Philadelphia, multiple times, Defendants got on planes and landed in
20
Philadelphias airport. They used Philadelphias police, firemen, and paramedics for
21
security and safety. They used Philadelphias infrastructure and highways to travel
22
to the concert venues. They used these venues to play to millions of fans in
23
Philadelphia and Pennsylvania.
24
168. For Jimmy Page, Robert Plant, or John Paul Jones, and other
25
Defendants, to claim in court filings that they have no regular and systematic
26
contacts with this foruma forum from which they each have received millions of
27
dollarsis disingenuous.
28
Venue Is Appropriate in the Eastern District of Pennsylvania

26
169. Because Defendants are subject to personal jurisdiction in the Eastern
District of Pennsylvania, venue is appropriate in this district pursuant to 28 U.S.C.
1400(a).
170. Federal district courts in Philadelphia have already held that many of
the Defendants in this suit, including Atlantic Recording and WMG, are subject to
personal jurisdiction, and venue, in Pennsylvania.
171. Defendants had no problem coming to Philadelphia to play for
hundreds of thousands of fans, and no problem making untold millions from the sale
of their music in this district; they should therefore have no problem appearing in
10
court in Philadelphia to defend their failure to credit the man who wrote their most
11
famous song.
12
*****
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
27
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
CAUSES OF ACTION
Count I Direct Copyright Infringement
Michael Skidmore, as Trustee for the Randy Craig Wolfe Trust v. Led Zeppelin, James
Patrick Page; Robert Anthony Plant; John Paul Jones; Super Hype Publishing, Inc.;
Warner Music Group Corporation; Warner/Chappell Music, Inc.; Atlantic Recording
Corporation; Rhino Entertainment Company; WB Music Corp.; Flames of Albion Music
Limited; Succubus Music Limited; Sons of Binion Limited; Super Hype Tapes Limited;
Classicberry Limited; Trolcharm Limited; JPJ Communications Limited
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
172. Plaintiff hereby incorporates by reference the preceding paragraphs and

173. To be liable for direct copyright infringement a defendant must have
had access to the work allegedly copied, and there must be substantial similarity
between the infringing work and the infringed work. Access can be established by
showing with direct or circumstantial evidence that the work in question was
actually copied. Access can also be established by demonstrating that the two works
are so strikingly similar that independent creation is precluded. Substantial similarity
is proven by demonstrating that an ordinary person would recognize the infringing
song as having been taken from the plaintiffs protected expression
174. Defendants, specifically Led Zeppelin, Jimmy Page, Robert Plant, John
Paul Jones, and John Bonham (deceased), first came to the United States in 1968.
Late in 1968, Zeppelin opened shows for Spirit, during which Taurus was played
by Randy California and Spirit.
175. During this time period, Led Zeppelin was influenced by Spirit and
even began to play a song by Spirit named Fresh Garbage in Zeppelins sets.
176. Defendant Page admitted in a 1972 interview that he found Spirits live
performances to be very good, acknowledging that Spirits performances struck
him on an emotional level.
28
28
177. On information and belief, Pages use of a Theremin, which helped
give Led Zeppelin its distinctive sound, began after Page saw Randy California
using the device at Spirits shows.
178. Defendants had direct access to Taurus by virtue of their close
interaction with the band Spirit and Randy California, and the fact that they listened
to Spirit play Taurus in concert, and likely purchased the album.
179. Access is also established because the similarities between Taurus
and the iconic notes, melody, chord progression, structure, tempo, instrumentation,
and feel of Stairway to Heaven are so strikingly similar that independent creation
10
is precluded.
11
180. Substantial similarity between Taurus and Stairway to Heaven is
12
established because, to a reasonable observer, the iconic notes, melody, chord
13
progression, structure, tempo, instrumentation, and feel of Stairway to Heaven
14
sound almost identical to Plaintiffs protected expression in Taurus.
15
181. Because Defendants undeniably had access to Taurus and copied
16
protected expression in Taurus to create Stairway to Heaven, they are liable for
17
direct copyright infringement.
18
182. Without authorization or permission, Defendants continue to exploit
19
Taurus as Stairway to Heaven, reaping tremendous financial rewards and other
20
pecuniary benefits, to the detriment of Plaintiff.
21
183. Defendants use of Taurus in Stairway to Heaven is subject to strict
22
liability, and/or was done with knowledge of the infringement and was reckless or
23
willful.
24
25
184. On information and belief, the initial and predicate acts of copying of
Taurus by Defendants occurred in the United States.
26
185. Defendant Jimmy Page is on record as saying how he allegedly created
27
Stairway to Heaven. In short, Page has stated that he always kept a cassette
28
recorder around, and the idea for Stairway came together from bits of taped music:
29
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
I had these pieces, these guitar pieces, that I wanted to

put together. I had a whole idea of a piece of music that I
really wanted to try and present to everybody and try and
come to terms with. Bit difficult really, because it started
on acoustic, and as you know it goes through to the
electric parts. But we had various run-throughs [at
Headley Grange] where I was playing the acoustic guitar
and jumping up and picking up the electric guitar. Robert
was sitting in the corner, or rather leaning against the
wall, and as I was routining the rest of the band with this
idea and this piece, he was just writing. And all of a
sudden he got up and started singing, along with another
run-through, and he must have had 80% of the words
there ... I had these sections, and I knew what order they
were going to go in, but it was just a matter of getting
everybody to feel comfortable with each gear shift that
was going to be coming.
See National Public Radio, Guitar Legend Jimmy Page, 2 June 2003.
14
186. On information and belief, Defendants initially tapedand/or obtained
15
recordings ofTaurus in and throughout the United States on multiple occasions,
16
inclusive of live performances, with the intention to later use and/or infringe this
17
artistic expression, which they did to create Stairway to Heaven.
18
*****
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
30
1
2
3
4
5
Count II Contributory Copyright Infringement

6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18

188. To state a claim contributory copyright infringement a plaintiff must
show that the defendants induced, caused, materially contributed to, and participated
in the infringement of Plaintiffs copyrighted song, Taurus.
189. Defendants had and have knowledge of the ongoing infringing activity
that is the subject of this lawsuitthe use of Taurus in Stairway to Heaven
and have induced and materially contributed to the infringing conduct of the direct
infringers of Plaintiffs copyrighted song, Taurus.
*****
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
31
1
2
3
4
5
Count III Vicarious Copyright Infringement

6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19

192. To state a claim for vicarious copyright infringement the defendants
must vicariously profit from the direct infringement while declining to exercise a
right to stop or limit the direct infringement.
193. Here, all Defendants profit from the dissemination, sale, distribution,
and licensing of the song Stairway to Heaven.
194. Furthermore, Defendants, as producers, publishers, songwriters, and
copyright holders, all have control over the dissemination, sale, distribution, and
licensing of the song Stairway to Heaven.
*****
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
32
1
2
3
4
5
6
Count IV Right of Attribution Equitable Relief

Falsification of Rock n Roll History
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

197. Randy wrote the iconic notes, melody, chord progression, structure,
tempo, instrumentation, and feel of significant portions of Stairway to Heaven,
which are instantly recognizable to any person remotely familiar with rock music.
198. The writing credits for Stairway to Heaven incorrectly do not list
Randy California as a writer of the song.
199. Defendants have knowingly been exploiting Stairway to Heaven
without crediting Randy California as a writer for the last forty-two years.
200. Plaintiff is entitled to equitable relief to ensure that Randy California be
added as a writer to Stairway to Heaven, because the four factor test governing
when equitable relief should be granted, explained in eBay Inc. v. MercExchange,
547 U.S. 388, 391 (2006), is satisfied:
a. Wolfe suffered irreparable injury and has no recourse through the
law because the right of attribution is not statutorily recognized.
b. Monetary damages alone are inadequate to compensate them for the
damage done to Randys professional music reputation. Moreover,
acknowledgement in and of itself is intrinsically valuable to human
beings and Randy expected to be fairly credited for the huge amount
of success attributable to Stairway to Heaven.
c. Crediting Randy California would impose no hardships on any
defendant.
33
d. The public interest would be served by such an acknowledgement as
it would be made aware that Randy was key writer and creator of the
greatest rock song ever written.
4
5
201. Defendants continue to represent to the public that Randy California

had no role in creating Stairway to Heaven.
202. Equitable relief should include an order that Defendants and the
Copyright Office be made to include Randy Craig Wolfe (aka Randy California) as a
writer of Stairway to Heaven.
*****
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
34
CLAIMS FOR RELIEF
2
3
Wherefore, Plaintiff demands judgment in his favor on all Counts and against
all Defendants for an amount well in excess of the jurisdictional amount required to
guarantee a jury trial. Plaintiff requests that this Court determine and declare that
Plaintiff is additionally awarded and afforded on all Counts:
(a)
Compensatory damages for all losses, together with interest, costs, and
delay damages;
(b)
Defendants profits in an amount according to proof at trial;
10
(c)
Statutory damages of $150,000 per infringement pursuant to 17 U.S.

Code 504 given the willfulness of Defendants conduct;
11
12
(d)
13
Punitive damages on all causes of actions to punish the Defendants for

their outrageous and duplicitous conduct;
14
(e)
Exemplary damages to set an example for others;
15
(f)
Equitable relief pursuant to 17 U.S. Code 502 and 503;
16
(g)
Injunctive and other equitable relief inclusive of but not limited to
17
impoundment, destruction, and halting of sales of the infringing
18
material.
19
(h)
Costs and attorneys fees; and
20
(i)
Such other and further relief as the Court deems just, necessary, and
21
appropriate under the circumstances or allowed by statute.
22
*****
23
24
25
26
27
28
35
1
2
3
4
*****
Respectfully submitted,
Francis Alexander, llc
10

Francis Alexander Malofiy, Esquire
Attorney ID No.: 208494
280 N. Providence Road | Suite 105
Media, PA 19063
T: (215) 500-1000
F: (215) 500-1005
Law Firm / Lawyer for Plaintiff
11
/d/ February 25, 2016
5
6
7
8
9
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
1
DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL
2
3
4
5
Plaintiff herby demands a trial by jury on all claims and issues so triable.
*****

Media, PA 19063
T: (215) 500-1000
F: (215) 500-1005
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2
1
2
VERIFICATION
I, Michael Skidmore, as Trustee for the Randy Craig Wolfe TrustPlaintiff in
this actionhereby declare under the penalty of perjury that the statements of fact
made in Plaintiffs Second Amended Complaint are true according to my personal
knowledge, except as to those matters stated on information and belief, and as to
those matters I believe them to be true.
Michael Skidmore
8
9
10
/s/ ___________________
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
3
SPOLIATION CLAUSE
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
Plaintiff demands that Defendants take necessary actions to ensure the

preservation of all documents and things related to the casein any format
hardcopy, electronic, audio, and visual, inclusive of but not limited to: the Master
recording of Stairway to Heaven, prior recordings of Stairway to Heaven, the
individual audio tracksboth from prior recordings, initial/early takes, and those
which are part of the final Master track, and any and all session audio, tracks, and
takeswhether or not used in the final Master.
Additionally, defendant Jimmy Page is on record as saying how he allegedly
created Stairway to Heaven. In short, Page has stated that he always kept a
cassette recorder around, and the idea for Stairway came together from bits of
taped music:
I had these pieces, these guitar pieces, that I wanted to put together. I
had a whole idea of a piece of music that I really wanted to try and
present to everybody and try and come to terms with. Bit difficult
really, because it started on acoustic, and as you know it goes through
to the electric parts. But we had various run-throughs [at Headley
Grange] where I was playing the acoustic guitar and jumping up and
picking up the electric guitar. Robert was sitting in the corner, or rather
leaning against the wall, and as I was routining the rest of the band with
this idea and this piece, he was just writing. And all of a sudden he got
up and started singing, along with another run-through, and he must
have had 80% of the words there ... I had these sections, and I knew
what order they were going to go in, but it was just a matter of getting
everybody to feel comfortable with each gear shift that was going to be
coming.
See National Public Radio, Guitar Legend Jimmy Page, 2 June 2003.
Plaintiff demands that Defendants preserve these bits and pieces of taped
music which formed the basis for Stairway to Heaven as well as any and all
recordings by the fire at Bropn-Yr-Aur or from Headley Grange when Stairway to
Heaven was allegedly written by Jimmy Page and later introduced and further
28
4
developed by Led Zeppelin.
Lastly, Defendants are put on notice to preserve all things, as listed above, as
well as information, materials, communications, or other content related to the
averments in this case.
*****
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
5
1
2
3
4
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
A true and correct copy of Plaintiffs Second Amended Complaint is being
hand delivered to the Court for filing and will be served upon counsel of record, and
Defendants in accordance with the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
Helene Freeman, Esquire

666 Fifth Avenue
New York, NY 10103-0084
T: (212) 841-0547
F: (212) 262-5152
E: hfreeman@phillipsnizer.com
Attorneys for Defendants James Patrick Page, Robert Anthony Plant, and John
Paul Jones (collectively with John Bonham (Deceased), professionally known as
Led Zeppelin)
Peter J. Anderson, Esquire
100 Wilshire Blvd. | Suite 2010
Santa Monica, CA 90401
T:(310) 260-6030
F: (310) 260-6040
E: pja@pjanderson.com
Attorney for Defendants Super Hype Publishing, Inc., Warner Music Group
Corp., Warner/Chappell Music, Inc., Atlantic Recording Corporation, and
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
6
1
2
Albion
3
4
5
Succubus
Binion
6
7
Super Hype Tapes
8
9
10
Classicberry
Trolcharm
Trolcharm Limited
11
12
13
JPJ
WB Music
WB Music Corp.
14
15
16
17
18
19
*****
25

Media, PA 19063
T: (215) 500-1000
F: (215) 500-1005
26
20
21
22
23
24
27
28
7
Exhibit List
Exhibit 1
Copyright Registration of Taurus
Exhibit 2
Copyright Registration of Stairway to Heaven
EXHIBIT 1
Copyright Registration of Taurus
EXHIBIT 2
Copyright Registration of
Stairway to Heaven

Skidmore v. Led Zeppelin - Motion To Amend Complaint PDF

Diunggah oleh

Informasi Dokumen

Deskripsi Asli:

Judul Asli

Hak Cipta

Format Tersedia

Bagikan dokumen Ini

Bagikan atau Tanam Dokumen

Opsi Berbagi

Apakah menurut Anda dokumen ini bermanfaat?

Apakah konten ini tidak pantas?

Hak Cipta:

Format Tersedia

Skidmore v. Led Zeppelin - Motion To Amend Complaint PDF

Diunggah oleh

Hak Cipta:

Format Tersedia

Case 2:15-cv-03462-RGK-AGR Document 98 Filed 02/25/16 Page 1 of 65 Page ID #:1674

Francis Malofiy, Esq.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

MICHAEL SKIDMORE, as Trustee for

Hon. R. Gary Klausner

Case No. 15-cv-03462 RGK (AGRx)

NOTICE OF MOTION AND

NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION FOR LEAVE TO AMEND COMPLAINT

Case 2:15-cv-03462-RGK-AGR Document 98 Filed 02/25/16 Page 2 of 65 Page ID #:1675

NOTICE .................................................................................................................... iii

MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES........................................... 1

FACTUAL BACKGROUND ......................................................................... 4

PLAINTIFFS PROPOSED AMENDMENT MEETS THE

PLAINTIFF ACTED IN GOOD FAITH AND HAS

THE SAC WILL NOT PREJUDICE DEFENDANTS OR

THE SAC STATES VALID CLAIMS AGAINST THE

Case 2:15-cv-03462-RGK-AGR Document 98 Filed 02/25/16 Page 3 of 65 Page ID #:1676

DCD Programs, Ltd. v. Leighton,

Eminence Capital, LLC v. Aspeon, Inc.,

Fed. R. Civ. P. 15(a)(2) ........................................................................................... 3, 4

Fed. R. Civ. P. 33(d) .................................................................................................... 5

Wright & Miller, Federal Practice and Procedure, 1487 ........................................ 10

Case 2:15-cv-03462-RGK-AGR Document 98 Filed 02/25/16 Page 4 of 65 Page ID #:1677

Plaintiffs counsel and Defendants counsel met and conferred regarding

Dated: February 25, 2016

FRANCIS ALEXANDER, LLC

/s/ Francis Alexander Malofiy

Case 2:15-cv-03462-RGK-AGR Document 98 Filed 02/25/16 Page 5 of 65 Page ID #:1678

MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES

Plaintiff seeks leave of Court to file a Second Amended Complaint (SAC)

ever been amended. However, Plaintiff learned through supplemental discovery

responses belatedly served by Defendants in January 2016, and confirmed this

proper adjudication of this case, in particular, to the determination of the issue of

damages resulting from Defendants copyright infringing actions. If leave to amend

Specifically, the proposed SAC, attached to this motion as Exhibit 1, names

Flames of Albion Music Limited: company used jointly by Defendants

publishing rights derived from the infringing work.

Succubus Music Limited: company used by Defendant Jimmy Page to

Sons of Binion Limited: company used by Defendant Robert Plant to

Super Hype Tapes Limited: company used jointly by Defendants

Case 2:15-cv-03462-RGK-AGR Document 98 Filed 02/25/16 Page 6 of 65 Page ID #:1679

Classicberry Limited: company used by Defendant Jimmy Page to

derived from the infringing work.

Trolcharm Limited: company used by Defendant Robert Plant to

derived from the infringing work.

JPJ Communications Limited: company used by Defendant John Paul

royalties derived from the infringing work.

WB Music Corp.: tool company used by defendant Warner/Chappell

proposed defendants listed above in items 1 through 7.

Public available information, such as copyright registrations, as well as the

initial disclosures and other documents produced by Defendants early in the

Case 2:15-cv-03462-RGK-AGR Document 98 Filed 02/25/16 Page 7 of 65 Page ID #:1680

interests in the infringing work.1

channeled through these Entities. See e.g. F. W. Woolworth Co. v. Contemporary

Arts, 344 U.S. 228, 229 (1952).

Other factors considered by courts in evaluating motions to amend under Rule

15(a) similarly militate in favor of permitting amendment here. As noted above,

provided by Defendants to determine the parties reaping benefits from the

identity of the Entities in late January, Plaintiffs counsel, a small practitioner,

Defendants refusal, prepared this Motion along with taking depositions,

Case 2:15-cv-03462-RGK-AGR Document 98 Filed 02/25/16 Page 8 of 65 Page ID #:1681